The Supreme Court of the USA today has agreed to review a case concerning an individual’s attempt to trademark a phrase that mocks former President Donald Trump as being “too small.”
The Justice Department is backing President Joe Biden’s former and potential future opponent and is urging the court to reject the trademark application for the phrase “Trump too small,” which a man from California intends to use on T-shirts.
The case is scheduled to be heard in the autumn and is one of two disputes on the court’s docket that involve Trump or his businesses. While government officials argue that the phrase “Trump too small” can still be used without trademark protection since Trump has not given his consent, a federal appeals court determined that denying trademark registration would infringe upon free speech rights.
In recent years, the Supreme Court has handled a number of cases related to Donald Trump. These cases have involved Trump’s claims of election fraud in 2000, his attempts to prevent the disclosure of his tax records to Congress and prosecutors in New York, and various other matters.
Despite the possibility that the justices may have grown weary of Trump-related cases, they have not shown any signs of it. Just last month, the Supreme Court agreed to hear another lawsuit connected to Trump, which stemmed from disputes over the Trump International Hotel in Washington.
Democratic members of the House Oversight Committee filed the lawsuit, challenging the Trump administration’s refusal to provide information about the Trump Organization’s lease of the hotel.
The current case is notable because it has the Biden administration supporting Trump’s position. The administration is defending the decision of government officials to reject Steve Elster’s trademark request for the phrase “Trump too small.”
The phrase in question originates from a notable exchange between Donald Trump and Marco Rubio during the 2016 presidential campaign.
During a rally, Rubio addressed Trump’s habit of calling him “little Marco” and made a remark about Trump’s hands, implying that men with small hands are untrustworthy. This comment was later brought up by Trump during a televised debate on March 3, 2016. Trump defended the size of his hands and indirectly addressed the implication made by Rubio, asserting that there was no issue in that regard.
According to federal law, a trademark application should be rejected if it includes the name, portrait, or signature of a living individual unless that person has provided written consent.
However, Steve Elster argues that denying the registration of a political slogan criticizing Trump without his consent violates the Free Speech clause of the First Amendment.
Elster’s legal team contends that the existing federal law essentially makes it extremely difficult to register a trademark that expresses an opinion about a public figure.
Elster’s lawyer, Jon Taylor, expressed eagerness to defend the right to convey essential political messages through trademarks. In an email, Taylor stated that the government’s attempt to burden political speech by granting public figures a monopoly over speech about them in the marketplace is indefensible.
